Sponsors
|
|
|
User login
|
|
|
Google search
|
|
|
|
|
By Suburb Repairman at 2009/05/11 - 5:00pm
|
|
I have been asked to evaluate whether tattoo/piercing studios should be allowed as a by-right or conditional use in our Central Business District; they are currently prohibited. This is a small city of 50,000+ with a university having 30,000 enrolled. The university is adjacent, and practically a part of downtown.
There are currently two tattoo studios in downtown, which are legal non-conforming uses from years ago.
I'm a bit indifferent about the whole thing, but I've never been in a place with a mega-high concentration of tattoo studios either to see the effects. Any thoughts on what I should consider as I evaluate how to treat these things?
|
|
|
|
By jsk1983 at 2009/05/10 - 5:00pm
|
|
Do such things exist beyond the general city wide ordinances? I'm working with a CDC centered in the Chicago Lawn neighborhood on the south side of Chicago and we are hoping to improve the aesthetics of the commercial corridor. One thing we noticed is that many of the signs are hand painted or otherwise unattractive and thus wondered if there was any way to regulate this. Obviously there are plenty of sign regulations out there, but they tend to be for historic districts and affluent suburbs.
|
|
|
|
By High Desert Drifter at 2009/05/09 - 5:00pm
|
|
As a rural planner I am frequently frustrated by developer requests for master plan amendments and zone changes to allow for high density development in undeveloped areas of the county. These requests are typically approved without consideration to the long-term costs of development activities or with much consideration to the additional value that the higher density provides to the developer.
There seems to be a mindset that everyone has a 'right to develop' without consideration of the externalities of development that are expected to be paid for later by the public. This strikes me as similar to the practice of not considering the cost of pollution that has led to the cap and trade of pollution credits being proposed by some in government.
|
|
|
|
By Whose Yur Planner at 2008/06/04 - 4:00pm
|
|
Got this via Law of the Land Blog. Wonder if they will include any planners?
Under the leadership of Edward J. Sullivan, immediate past chair of the ABA State and Local Government Law Section, and a member of the Portland, Oregon, firm of Garvey Schubert Barer, the State and Local Government Law Section and the Administrative Law Section created a joint task force to focus on developing fair procedures for the enactment and administration of land use regulations. This multi-year effort, with input from Association members and others in the field, has resulted in a proposed model act that will be the subject of discussion in August 2008 as the matter is reviewed by the ABA House of Delegates.
|
|
|
|
By Plan-it at 2008/04/28 - 4:00pm
|
|
I have been doing research on policies and regulations to protect areas that are designated as Industrial on our Future Development Map from non-industrial (residential) incursion. This has the impact of inceasing land values due to speculation and placing future residents and future/existing businesses in a potentially adversarial relationship.
I have noticed San Francisco, Seattle, and Chicago have looked at this issue and have developed policies and programs to remediate the situation. Does anyone else done any research, policies, or programs that address this problem who would not mind sharing? Thanks!
|
|
|
|
By Rambler at 2008/03/12 - 4:00pm
|
|
Growing up and being educated in Virginia, outdoor advertising was almost non-existent in most areas. Only now do I understand how much this attributed to the beauty of its natural landscape. After moving to Atlanta, one of the first things I noticed while driving in was the endless number of billboards dotting the highways. Having never seen them in this density before, I was saddened at how much impact they had while traveling through Tennessee and Georgia.
|
|
|
|